Dude, I respect your profession, but your ignorance is embarrassing. Guess what the BBC uses? One of the biggest news organizations in the world. Yup you guessed it, FCPX. Ever of heard of the film "Focus" with Will Smith and Margot Robbie? FCPX. What about "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot"? FCPX. To call FCPX a toy and that no one does or will ever use it for professional work is incredibly narrow minded of you. I know plenty of professional editors that uses FCPX on a daily basis. The reason most studios don't use it, is because of it's lack of shared workflow. It's one of it's shortcomings. Your argument might have been valid in 2011, but it's 2017 and FCPX has come a long way.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ADM Radeon Pro 580
- Thread starter elmarjazz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Dude, I respect your profession, but your ignorance is embarrassing. Guess what the BBC uses? One of the biggest news organizations in the world. Yup you guessed it, FCPX. Ever of heard of the film "Focus" with Will Smith and Margot Robbie? FCPX. What about "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot"? FCPX. To call FCPX a toy and that no one does or will ever use it for professional work is incredibly narrow minded of you. I know plenty of professional editors that uses FCPX on a daily basis. The reason most studios don't use it, is because of it's lack of shared workflow. It's one of it's shortcomings. Your argument might have been valid in 2011, but it's 2017 and FCPX has come a long way.
Those codecs you mentioned are very CPU dependent actually. A little less as you said relative to h.264 et al. since they are intermediaries and not delivery codecs, but they still tax the CPU a fair amount.
Bottom line is that CPU's are really important in post production.
Your opinion on FCP X is just lol. Typical uninformed and savagely brainwashed techie Macrumors poster, claiming all sorts of "industry" professionalism but has clearly never even used the app that they trash talk.
This is why most of the internet stopped taking this website seriously and you guys are left to languish in your own little filter bubble of vitriol and hate.
Actually no, you sound like a bored AE who's supposed to be syncing metadata but instead you're jerking off online flexing your opinions like whoever you wished you were
Dave is one of the best-known video educators.
4k Red RAW is not what we're talking about. That is an esoteric niche that in no way defines the general, common way editing platforms use CPU and GPU.
My documentary crew often shoots one terabyte of 4k H264 per *day*. Dailies and selects must be done on that -- it can't be transcoded in the field. Those operations are CPU limited, not GPU limited. While high end, this more typifies the common usage cases today. The world is a lot bigger than the small niche of feature films, which in total can barely provide enough revenue to keep Avid alive -- only about $200 million per year.
FCPX is widely used by video production professionals. The below Hollywood films were and are being edited on FCPX:
Focus: http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/focus/
Whisky Tango Foxtrot: http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/art...y-tango-foxtrot-was-edited-on-final-cut-pro-x
Geostorm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostorm
And major TV network operations: http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/art...inal-cut-pro-x-in-national-network-operations
If you mean offline editing, ok.
"Focus" -- Finished in Quantel. Final Cut Pro X was an offline editor.
"Whisky Tango Foxtrot" -- Finishing in Lightroom and Quantel. Final Cut Pro X was an offline editor.
"Geostorm" -- Not out yet.
"And major TV network operations" -- One article of a guy in a room doing injecting and editing footage? No way to convince me of anything important here. For one he is not working in a collaborative environment with multiple edit stations. Yeah of course one guy in one room could use iMovie or DV edit Pro, or Montague, or Media 100, to do anything, but does it means its used in Professional environment? Yes it is in the facility, but it is not that studios major workflow.
[doublepost=1497276849][/doublepost]
Using a CPU and being Multithreading, requiring multiple cores on the CPU to decode a codec are two totally different things. You guys are mixing up the two.
You can think whatever you want, I've been doing this for a long time, and nothing is coming from hate, I used to love Final Cut. I worked with Apple on the original BETA of Final Cut after it was brought over from Macromedia. I was a pro user before Apple killed Final Cut and make it Final Cut Pro X, or iMovie Pro. I used to run around LA with a copy of Final Cut and SHAKE for composting and underbid every studio in town to get overflow VFX and editing work.
And as for Final Cut Pro X, we use Final Cut Pro X all the time in our studio when people bring in projects and we have to finish them, so we get a fair dose of Final Cut Pro X use, and no one in our studio would ever use it for more than bringing in another project.
^^^^
I love how you go from, "Final Cut Pro X is a toy. No one in any professional edit or tv environment or film for that matter uses Final Cut Pro X. It is a toy."
to
[Well it wasn't onlined and finished in FCPX..SO THERE!
PSH it was probably only one guy doing it!
Oh and we use it too because we don't have a choice! WAAAA!]
FCPX is a professional tool. Get off your high horse and get over it.
I love how you go from, "Final Cut Pro X is a toy. No one in any professional edit or tv environment or film for that matter uses Final Cut Pro X. It is a toy."
to
[Well it wasn't onlined and finished in FCPX..SO THERE!
PSH it was probably only one guy doing it!
Oh and we use it too because we don't have a choice! WAAAA!]
FCPX is a professional tool. Get off your high horse and get over it.
At this point the conversation has moved into silliness, I can Offline Edit in TextEdit, creating timecode and cultists, writing it out by hand, so I guess TextEdit is an Offline Edit tool as well. So by your argument TextEdit is a professional edit tool?
If we got a list of professional edit studios in Los Angeles or NYC and called them, and asked how many editors are using Final Cut Pro X to produce TV and Commercial content, you would get the answer of Zero. That is a fact. So coming from an industry stand point, if it is a professional tool, how come no one is using it?
I am not coming from some jaded perspective on Final Cut Pro X, I used to love Final Cut. I'm coming from industry knowledge.
Anybody can use any tool to make anything they want, but when Apple said, hey edit community, your replacement for Final Cut Pro is Final Cut Pro X?? Then you have to call out Apple, because it is a bunch of garbage. Final Cut Pro X was never a decent replacement for Final Cut Pro, or any professional editor. It is just fact.
[doublepost=1497286090][/doublepost]
If someone can state a few movies that where made on Final Cut Pro X, it in no way defines an industry. Of the close to 1000 movies made a year over the past 10 years, 3 where made on Final Cur Pro X? That is laughable. Yes Final Cut Pro X is not setup for shared workflow, so it in no way can used professionally.
It is funny Apple killed Final Cut making Final Cut Pro X, and now it is come a long way? Isn't that 3 steps backwards, 2 steps forward.
Your text edit argument... I'm not going to even reply to that. What a desperate attempt at a rebuttal.
Ya Im sure if you called the big post houses in LA or New York most of them would be using Avid. That's the reality and I never said the all of these huge studios are using it. That was never my argument.
You're clearly coming from a hurt and bitter perspective like most people who can't accept FCPX as a professional tool ever since it was released in 2011. A lot of people were hurt at that time, I get it. It wasn't good then.
My argument simply came from this quote of yours.
"Final Cut Pro X is a toy. No one in any professional edit or tv environment or film for that matter uses Final Cut Pro X. It is a toy."
It's ignorant. I never said FCPX was being used by all of these top end post houses, but I listed examples of FCPX being used in a professional setting. It's been used on high end productions by professionals, that is fact you can't dispute. Of course it's not a lot, thats not the point! I know the people that worked with it on both of those movies listed and have talked with many people that use on it daily basis. You can continue to blab on and on about how you hate FCPX and why no one uses it, but it doesn't change the fact that professional editors are using it today.
To each his own, and yes when Apple turned Final Cut into Final Cut Pro X, it was a big middle finger to the professional edit community, a sentiment that can't be undone.
To whether or not Final Cut Pro X is a real editing system? We will have to agree to disagree. I don't know any other people besides editors, producers, cg artists and VFX artists in the post production community. I don't know anyone that uses Final Cut Pro X, but 10 some years ago when Apple made Final Cut and SHAKE, everyone was using those programs.
I will agree, I don't speak for everyone, but maybe if Apple takes a look at the pro community more in the future, I will start seeing Final Cut Pro X editors.
We will all have to agree to disagree.
That was you bro, you came in with the vitriol calling FCP X a toy lol
Go back to work dude
Haha, you go get some work bro! No one would hire you with Final Cut Pro X on your resume. And in my opinion it still is a toy, no brosefs on MacRumors is going to change that.
I've been hired with FCPX on my resume. Well luckily your opinion isn't a fact.
Yes and TextEdit and Microsoft Word where probably on there as well, coincidence? Also I was referring to editing jobs at professional edit facilities.
There you go again with your "Silliness".
Yes, I was hired to work on a documentary at Universal.
Your cutting a documentary at Universal on Final Cut Pro X? A documentary about Universal? Whats the name of the movie? I used to know some producers there.. I'll look into it.
pro tip: you risk embarassing yourself IRL (I'm sure you know that hollywood is a small town) when you say stuff like this. You don't know who I am, or whether or not I use FCP X for my work. As if that even matters anyway because it's about the content you produce and not the means to do it.
And judging from your comments and attitude, it seems you don't really make much content at all, just like the prosumers you ridicule.
Stay humble.
No it wasn't cut in FCPX. You said that no one would ever hire me with FCPX on my resume. I had it right at the top with all the other NLE's I know. I was hired.
versus
You are contradicting yourself with those two statements.
Yes LA is small, and you don't know who I am either. Maybe we are working together right now.. Are you in Santa Monica by chance?
I am a novice in video editing and I would appreciate some real life examples, as I am trying to decide between buying latest iMac 2017 with i7 4.2Gz + Radeon Pro 580 or building a PC also with i7 4.2Gz and GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
Since I primarily work in Premiere and After Effects, currently editing mostly for youtube h.264 and 1080p/1440p, with this configuration, say exactly same project, this iMac vs PC:
I am inclined more towards latest 2017 iMac (not pro) as I’ve been using iMacs before… and I really like 5K build-in display. I am not sure if there is a similar stand-alone 5K monitor that does not cost a ton like LG Ultrafine 5K.
But mainly, I want to feel VERY comfortable when working in Premiere/AF, and I am ok to wait for export…
Please advice, thank you.
Since I primarily work in Premiere and After Effects, currently editing mostly for youtube h.264 and 1080p/1440p, with this configuration, say exactly same project, this iMac vs PC:
- which one will be faster working in timeline w/o pre-rendering footage (moving around, scrubbing, adding effects, etc) How significant will be this difference?
- which one will be faster exporting for youtube 1080p/1440p. How faster would it be? 10 min? 30 min?
I am inclined more towards latest 2017 iMac (not pro) as I’ve been using iMacs before… and I really like 5K build-in display. I am not sure if there is a similar stand-alone 5K monitor that does not cost a ton like LG Ultrafine 5K.
But mainly, I want to feel VERY comfortable when working in Premiere/AF, and I am ok to wait for export…
Please advice, thank you.
windows pc build all the way, it's way cheaper and premiere will literally fly on 1080/1440p resolutions. also you can build it hackintosh friendly too. for the monitor look at the LG 27UD68P, it's a nice 4k.
My question is whether we will be able to consume VR content on the higher end (i.e., 580) machines. If you can create, you must be able to consume, correct?
Most certainly as VR content (apps) run on an iPhone! Framerate and smoothness of scenes will vary depending on the complexity of scenes however.
The total "industry" revenue to vendors of video editing software is tiny. That is why Avid -- who has over 90% market share in that segment -- is barely in business financially. In the book "Behind the Seen", Walter Murch repeatedly described how tiny and inconsequential "The Industry" was to the larger community of video editing: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0735714266/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_dp_T2_Ab7pzbD446ZXN
Today the universe of video production is much larger than "The Industry", and in the era of New Media, what happens there is increasingly irrelevant to the wider universe of video production.
FCPX works very well in a collaborative, shared workflow environment, and is commonly used this way in professional productions: http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/art...nal-cut-pro-x-and-a-lumaforge-jellyfish-again
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Apple ran VR demos with Radeon Pro 580 at WWDC'17. It is sufficient for consuming VR.
Curious, what programs did the majority of users migrate to(in your area)? Adobe Premiere and After Effects?